From nobody Thu Feb 01 18:31:22 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TQnYB0jhgz58P84 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:31:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Received: from smtp.krpservers.com (smtp.krpservers.com [62.13.128.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.krpservers.com", Issuer "RapidSSL TLS RSA CA G1" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TQnY95Jmsz4Dqk for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:31:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from [10.12.30.106] by smtp.krpservers.com (8.16.1/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 411IVMQ7009949 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:31:23 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tdx.co.uk; s=krpdkim; t=1706812283; bh=fupx3TGPTBNVUKxCSjg5yIu3v0+pny02zxS7dtSPXL4=; h=Date:From:To:Subject; b=S6dC8SgKKVP0DFDCcs275+KEVs3taOroyNGizjQhoThIsnOxfO9SLXQ5TB3ZJNw7a qMuf5uCgQyu8wJhRPNch1I+ErRLb02HOeMmboo6uPDHnPyNt9JjUqYwHaWtbE+NvDD VcCyphcS9m6L5HPY+5S+fr0BOIiJOw/4A25MZbIaro5kQ5yLozCysphesfc3yN/gb7 6QOTetiUFKpBqk629GVB8PrxPXwUQpwS2vUBIM7AKqX4kn/5mm7iJhp2rEJ6YRRBIO a/Gt2bYVeqI7RdjXcBSLEY0YAlnb56Kvi7u3HNLFuDv1HmmvXznpTVuoVLqRywyze8 NJbcu1EjOU6UQ== Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 18:31:22 +0000 From: Karl Pielorz To: Mark Millard , FreeBSD Hackers Subject: Re: ... was killed: a thread waited too long to allocate a page [actually: was killed: failed to reclaim memory problem] Message-ID: <25AE8AA9598F0FDEB97B2C47@[10.12.30.106]> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32) List-Id: Technical discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-hackers List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TQnY95Jmsz4Dqk X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:60969, ipnet:62.13.128.0/22, country:GB] --On 01 February 2024 08:30 -0800 Mark Millard wrote: > [snip] > > One direction of control is . . . > > What do you have for ( copied from my /boot/loader.conf ): > ># ># Delay when persistent low free RAM leads to ># Out Of Memory killing of processes: > vm.pageout_oom_seq=120 loader.conf is empty - it's a pretty stock / out the box install. > The default is 12 (last I knew, anyway). Yes, default is 12 here. > The 120 figure has allowed me and others to do buildworld, > buildkernel, and poudriere bulk runs on small arm boards > using all cores that otherwise got "failed to reclaim > memory" (to use the modern, improved [not misleading] > message text). Similarly for others that had other kinds > of contexts that got the message. > > (The units for the 120 are not time units: more like a > number of (re)tries to gain at least a target amount of > Free RAM before failure handling starts. The comment > wording is based on a consequence of the assignment.) > > The 120 is not a maximum, just a figure that has proved > useful in various contexts. > > But see the notes below based as well. Thanks for the notes. I think I can reproduce this (but it's painful to do - as is pretty much any production server killing all it's procs) so I'll wait until next run. I've set the vm.pageout_oom_seq=120 if only because it's a runtime option (no reboot). It's been many, many years since I had to do anything with default arc sizing on FreeBSD (thankfully) - something I wouldn't want to really do again for such a 'simple' machine. I've noted the change here - and we'll see how it goes. > That 24G+ of wired meant that only 8GiBytes- were > available everything else. Avoiding that by limiting > the ARC (tuning ZFS) or adjusting how the work load > is spread over time or some combination also looks > appropriate. tbh - 8GiB is probably more than enough for what's running on that machine (very little) - but I take your point. Cheers, -Karl